pith. the verified trust layer for science. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18094 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 💻 cs.CV

Decision-Aware Attention Propagation for Vision Transformer Explainability

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 04:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV
keywords Vision Transformersmodel explainabilityattention rolloutgradient attributionattribution mapsinterpretabilitycomputer visiondecision-aware propagation
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

Integrating gradient-based token importance into attention rollout produces more faithful and class-sensitive explanations for Vision Transformer predictions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Vision Transformers make predictions by propagating information through complex layered attention, but standard attention-based explanations often overlook the final decision and produce diffuse maps. Gradient methods better highlight class-specific evidence yet ignore the model's structural flow. The paper introduces Decision-Aware Attention Propagation to estimate token importance via gradients and fold those priors into layer-wise attention rollout. This hybrid yields attribution maps that more closely track what the model actually relies on for its output. The approach matters because clearer explanations support trust and debugging in vision applications.

Core claim

By estimating token importance through gradient-based localization and integrating it into layer-wise attention rollout, the method captures both the structural flow of attention and the evidence most relevant to the final prediction. Consequently, it produces attribution maps that are more class sensitive, compact, and faithful than those generated by conventional attention-based methods.

What carries the argument

Decision-Aware Attention Propagation (DAP), which injects gradient-estimated token importance priors into the layer-wise attention rollout process.

If this is right

  • Attribution maps become more class sensitive and better distinguish between different predictions.
  • The maps focus more compactly on decision-relevant image regions.
  • Quantitative metrics of faithfulness improve over pure attention and pure gradient baselines.
  • The improvements remain consistent across Vision Transformer variants of different sizes.
  • Qualitative results align more closely with the model's actual decision evidence.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar decision-aware weighting could be tested on other attention-based architectures such as those used in language or multimodal models.
  • The method may reveal cases where attention structure alone misleads by showing when gradient signals override or reinforce rollout paths.
  • It suggests a broader pattern for hybrid explanations that respect both model architecture and output sensitivity in any layered network.

Load-bearing premise

Gradient-based localization estimates give reliable token importance that can be merged directly into attention rollout without adding bias or losing the transformer's propagation structure.

What would settle it

Controlled tests on standard faithfulness benchmarks where DAP maps score equal or lower than raw attention rollout on deletion/insertion metrics, or fail to improve class discrimination in visualizations on datasets with known ground-truth regions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18094 by Gangjae Jang, Haesol Park, Sehyeong Jo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overall pipeline of Decision-Aware Attention Propagation (DAP) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Layer-wise Attention Map Comparison Across Methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Evaluation of Explanation Quality via Deletion, Mass, and Alignment Curves [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Vision Transformers (ViTs) have become a dominant architecture in computer vision, yet their prediction process remains difficult to interpret because information is propagated through complex interactions across layers and attention heads. Existing attention based explanation methods provide an intuitive way to trace information flow. However, they rely mainly on raw attention weights, which do not explicitly reflect the final decision and often lead to explanations with limited class discriminability. In contrast, gradient based localization methods are more effective at highlighting class specific evidence, but they do not fully exploit the hierarchical attention propagation mechanism of transformers. To address this limitation, we propose Decision-Aware Attention Propagation (DAP), an attribution method that injects decision-relevant priors into transformer attention propagation. By estimating token importance through gradient based localization and integrating it into layer wise attention rollout, the method captures both the structural flow of attention and the evidence most relevant to the final prediction. Consequently, DAP produces attribution maps that are more class sensitive, compact, and faithful than those generated by conventional attention based methods. Extensive experiments across Vision Transformer variants of different model scales show that DAP consistently outperforms existing baselines in both quantitative metrics and qualitative visualizations, indicating that decision aware propagation is an effective direction for improving ViT interpretability.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes Decision-Aware Attention Propagation (DAP) as an attribution method for Vision Transformers. It estimates token importance via gradient-based localization and injects these priors into layer-wise attention rollout to generate attribution maps claimed to be more class-sensitive, compact, and faithful than those from conventional attention-based explainability techniques. The authors assert that extensive experiments on ViT variants of varying scales demonstrate consistent outperformance in quantitative metrics and qualitative visualizations.

Significance. If the central claims are substantiated, DAP would offer a useful hybrid approach that combines the decision-specificity of gradients with the structural propagation of attention rollout, potentially improving the reliability of ViT explanations in computer vision applications. The absence of machine-checked proofs or parameter-free derivations is noted, but the method's compositional nature could still advance the field if the integration step is rigorously validated.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (Method): the decision-aware reweighting of per-layer attention matrices by gradient-derived token priors is not shown to preserve the row-stochastic or flow-semantic properties required for valid attention rollout; gradient sign flips or noise could create spurious high-importance paths that do not correspond to forward-pass evidence, directly undermining the claim that DAP remains faithful to the transformer's structural propagation.
  2. [§4] §4 (Experiments): the faithfulness evaluation relies on insertion/deletion metrics that are themselves gradient-sensitive, creating a circularity risk where the hybrid construction is rewarded for exactly the biases it introduces; no ablation isolating the effect of the reweighting step versus pure rollout is reported, leaving the central outperformance claim unsupported at the level of controls.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §3] The abstract and method description would benefit from an explicit equation defining the reweighting operation (e.g., how priors are multiplied or added into attention matrices) to clarify the precise integration.
  2. [Throughout] Notation for the composite attribution map could be standardized across sections to avoid ambiguity between raw attention rollout and the decision-aware variant.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thoughtful review and constructive suggestions. Below we respond to each major comment, indicating the revisions we plan to make to address the concerns.

read point-by-point responses
  1. Referee: [§3] the decision-aware reweighting of per-layer attention matrices by gradient-derived token priors is not shown to preserve the row-stochastic or flow-semantic properties required for valid attention rollout; gradient sign flips or noise could create spurious high-importance paths that do not correspond to forward-pass evidence, directly undermining the claim that DAP remains faithful to the transformer's structural propagation.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript does not explicitly demonstrate the preservation of row-stochastic and flow-semantic properties after the decision-aware reweighting. The integration of gradient priors could potentially introduce issues with sign flips or noise leading to spurious paths. To address this, we will revise Section 3 to include a detailed description of the reweighting and normalization procedure, along with a proof sketch or empirical validation that the properties are maintained. We will also add experiments assessing the impact of gradient noise on the resulting attribution maps. This will better support the faithfulness claim. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] the faithfulness evaluation relies on insertion/deletion metrics that are themselves gradient-sensitive, creating a circularity risk where the hybrid construction is rewarded for exactly the biases it introduces; no ablation isolating the effect of the reweighting step versus pure rollout is reported, leaving the central outperformance claim unsupported at the level of controls.

    Authors: We agree that there is a risk of circularity in using insertion/deletion metrics for evaluating a gradient-influenced method, as these metrics may favor approaches that align with gradient biases. Additionally, the lack of an ablation study isolating the reweighting effect versus pure rollout leaves the source of improvements unclear. In the revised manuscript, we will add an ablation study in Section 4 that compares the full DAP method against a version using only attention rollout without gradient reweighting. We will also discuss the limitations of the chosen faithfulness metrics and consider alternative evaluation approaches if necessary. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: compositional method with independent external components

full rationale

The paper defines DAP as the explicit composition of two pre-existing operations (gradient-based token importance from localization methods and layer-wise attention rollout) without any self-referential fitting, parameter estimation that is then renamed as a prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain. The derivation chain consists of (1) computing gradients for token priors, (2) injecting those priors into per-layer attention matrices, and (3) performing rollout; none of these steps mathematically reduces the final attribution map to the inputs by construction. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results is invoked. The central claim of improved class sensitivity and faithfulness is an empirical assertion evaluated against external metrics, not a tautological consequence of the method definition itself.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method rests on standard domain assumptions from the transformer interpretability literature rather than new axioms or invented entities.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Layer-wise attention rollout accurately captures the hierarchical flow of information in Vision Transformers.
    Invoked when the method integrates token importance into the rollout process.
  • domain assumption Gradient-based localization yields token importance scores that are meaningfully aligned with the final class decision.
    Used to inject decision-relevant priors into the propagation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5513 in / 1273 out tokens · 42317 ms · 2026-05-10T04:18:52.312584+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale

    Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weissenborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Sylvain Gelly, et al. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929, 2020

  2. [2]

    A survey on vision transformer.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 45(1):87–110, 2022

    Kai Han, Yunhe Wang, Hanting Chen, Xinghao Chen, Jianyuan Guo, Zhenhua Liu, Yehui Tang, An Xiao, Chunjing Xu, Yixing Xu, et al. A survey on vision transformer.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 45(1):87–110, 2022

  3. [3]

    Visual transformer-based models: A survey

    Xiaonan Huang, Ning Bi, and Jun Tan. Visual transformer-based models: A survey. In International Conference on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, pages 295–305. Springer, 2022

  4. [4]

    Explainable convolutional neural networks: A taxonomy, review, and future directions.ACM Computing Surveys, 55(10):1–37, 2023

    Rami Ibrahim and M Omair Shafiq. Explainable convolutional neural networks: A taxonomy, review, and future directions.ACM Computing Surveys, 55(10):1–37, 2023

  5. [5]

    Utilizing customized cnn for brain tumor prediction with explainable ai.Heliyon, 10(20), 2024

    Md Imran Nazir, Afsana Akter, Md Anwar Hussen Wadud, and Md Ashraf Uddin. Utilizing customized cnn for brain tumor prediction with explainable ai.Heliyon, 10(20), 2024

  6. [6]

    A survey of the vision transformers and their cnn-transformer based variants

    Asifullah Khan, Zunaira Rauf, Anabia Sohail, Abdul Rehman Khan, Hifsa Asif, Aqsa Asif, and Umair Farooq. A survey of the vision transformers and their cnn-transformer based variants. Artificial Intelligence Review, 56(Suppl 3):2917–2970, 2023

  7. [7]

    Explainabil- ity of vision transformers: A comprehensive review and new perspectives.Multimedia Tools and Applications, 85(2):115, 2026

    Rojina Kashefi, Leili Barekatain, Mohammad Sabokrou, and Fatemeh Aghaeipoor. Explainabil- ity of vision transformers: A comprehensive review and new perspectives.Multimedia Tools and Applications, 85(2):115, 2026

  8. [8]

    https://arxiv.org/html/2506.21812?utm_source=chatgpt.com

    Avash Palikhe, Zhenyu Yu, Zichong Wang, and Wenbin Zhang. Towards transparent ai: A survey on explainable large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21812, 2025

  9. [9]

    Explainable artificial intelligence (xai): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible ai.Information fusion, 58:82–115, 2020

    Alejandro Barredo Arrieta, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, Javier Del Ser, Adrien Bennetot, Siham Tabik, Alberto Barbado, Salvador García, Sergio Gil-López, Daniel Molina, Richard Ben- jamins, et al. Explainable artificial intelligence (xai): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible ai.Information fusion, 58:82–115, 2020

  10. [10]

    Explainability and evaluation of vision transformers: An in-depth experimental study.Electronics, 13(1):175, 2023

    Sédrick Stassin, Valentin Corduant, Sidi Ahmed Mahmoudi, and Xavier Siebert. Explainability and evaluation of vision transformers: An in-depth experimental study.Electronics, 13(1):175, 2023

  11. [11]

    Explainability and vision foundation models: A survey.Information Fusion, 122:103184, 2025

    Rémi Kazmierczak, Eloïse Berthier, Goran Frehse, and Gianni Franchi. Explainability and vision foundation models: A survey.Information Fusion, 122:103184, 2025. ISSN 1566-2535. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2025.103184. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S156625352500257X

  12. [12]

    Quantifying attention flow in transformers

    Samira Abnar and Willem Zuidema. Quantifying attention flow in transformers. InProceedings of the 58th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, pages 4190–4197, 2020

  13. [13]

    Attribution rollout: a new way to interpret visual transformer.Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 14(1):163–173, 2023

    Li Xu, Xin Yan, Weiyue Ding, and Zechao Liu. Attribution rollout: a new way to interpret visual transformer.Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 14(1):163–173, 2023

  14. [14]

    Transformer interpretability beyond attention visualization

    Hila Chefer, Shir Gur, and Lior Wolf. Transformer interpretability beyond attention visualization. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 782–791, 2021

  15. [15]

    Gmar: gradient-driven multi-head attention rollout for vision transformer interpretability

    Sehyeong Jo, Gangjae Jang, and Haesol Park. Gmar: gradient-driven multi-head attention rollout for vision transformer interpretability. In2025 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pages 582–587. IEEE, 2025

  16. [16]

    Learning deep features for discriminative localization

    Bolei Zhou, Aditya Khosla, Agata Lapedriza, Aude Oliva, and Antonio Torralba. Learning deep features for discriminative localization. InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 2921–2929, 2016. 10

  17. [17]

    Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization

    Ramprasaath R Selvaraju, Michael Cogswell, Abhishek Das, Ramakrishna Vedantam, Devi Parikh, and Dhruv Batra. Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. InProceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pages 618–626, 2017

  18. [18]

    Grad-cam++: Generalized gradient-based visual explanations for deep convolutional networks

    Aditya Chattopadhay, Anirban Sarkar, Prantik Howlader, and Vineeth N Balasubramanian. Grad-cam++: Generalized gradient-based visual explanations for deep convolutional networks. In2018 IEEE winter conference on applications of computer vision (WACV), pages 839–847. IEEE, 2018

  19. [19]

    Class-discriminative attention maps for vision transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.02364, 2023

    Lennart Brocki, Jakub Binda, and Neo Christopher Chung. Class-discriminative attention maps for vision transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.02364, 2023

  20. [20]

    Attention guided cam: visual explanations of vision transformer guided by self-attention

    Saebom Leem and Hyunseok Seo. Attention guided cam: visual explanations of vision transformer guided by self-attention. InProceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 38, pages 2956–2964, 2024

  21. [21]

    Legrad: An explainability method for vision transformers via feature formation sensitivity

    Walid Bousselham, Angie Boggust, Sofian Chaybouti, Hendrik Strobelt, and Hilde Kuehne. Legrad: An explainability method for vision transformers via feature formation sensitivity. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 20336– 20345, 2025

  22. [22]

    Imagenet: A large- scale hierarchical image database

    Jia Deng, Wei Dong, Richard Socher, Li-Jia Li, Kai Li, and Li Fei-Fei. Imagenet: A large- scale hierarchical image database. In2009 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 248–255. Ieee, 2009

  23. [23]

    How to train your ViT? Data, augmentation, and regularization in vision transformers

    Andreas Steiner, Alexander Kolesnikov, , Xiaohua Zhai, Ross Wightman, Jakob Uszkoreit, and Lucas Beyer. How to train your vit? data, augmentation, and regularization in vision transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.10270, 2021

  24. [24]

    Pytorch image models

    Ross Wightman. Pytorch image models. https://github.com/huggingface/ pytorch-image-models, 2019. 11 Appendix A Detailed Metric Definitions This appendix provides implementation details and additional interpretation for the evaluation metrics used in the main paper. While the main text focuses on concise definitions, here we clarify how each metric is comp...